Twitter Spaces Deep Dive: What Happened at Harvard?
2023/06/21
再生時間： 1 時間 23 分
ポッドキャスト

カートのアイテムが多すぎます

ご購入は五十タイトルがカートに入っている場合のみです。

カートに追加できませんでした。

しばらく経ってから再度お試しください。

ウィッシュリストに追加できませんでした。

しばらく経ってから再度お試しください。

ほしい物リストの削除に失敗しました。

しばらく経ってから再度お試しください。

ポッドキャストのフォローに失敗しました

ポッドキャストのフォロー解除に失敗しました

Twitter Spaces Deep Dive: What Happened at Harvard?

無料で聴く

ポッドキャストの詳細を見る

サマリー
This episode was initially recorded on Twitter Spaces on June 12, 2023
TRIGGER WARNING: racism, homophobia, mental/emotional abuse, eating disorders, body shaming, gaslighting, sexual harassment, hazing.
The Boston Globe & The Athletic articles reported allegations of mistreatment and misconduct toward players by Harvard Women's Hockey Coach Katey Stone and claims of hazing within the program. The university hired the law firm Jenner & Block to conduct the review in March. A school spokesperson confirmed the investigation was complete, per The Athletic, on June 6th.

Founding 4 Pod Discussion Points
Where do you draw the line when it comes to players’ experiences? AR: What one player might laugh off as harmless fun, another player could get extremely affected by, and both experiences are valid and should be seen as such.
How do you toe that line?
What are the nuances of a discussion like that, and when should enough be enough?
How indicative is this of a larger problem in women’s hockey?
★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★
続きを読む一部表示

あらすじ・解説

This episode was initially recorded on Twitter Spaces on June 12, 2023

TRIGGER WARNING: racism, homophobia, mental/emotional abuse, eating disorders, body shaming, gaslighting, sexual harassment, hazing.

The Boston Globe & The Athletic articles reported allegations of mistreatment and misconduct toward players by Harvard Women's Hockey Coach Katey Stone and claims of hazing within the program. The university hired the law firm Jenner & Block to conduct the review in March. A school spokesperson confirmed the investigation was complete, per The Athletic, on June 6th.

Founding 4 Pod Discussion Points

Where do you draw the line when it comes to players’ experiences? AR: What one player might laugh off as harmless fun, another player could get extremely affected by, and both experiences are valid and should be seen as such.
How do you toe that line?
What are the nuances of a discussion like that, and when should enough be enough?
How indicative is this of a larger problem in women’s hockey?

★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

続きを読む一部表示